Super-Dispatchers: Remote Operations Centers for On-Demand Fleet Management

Victoria Chibuogu Nneji1, Mary (Missy) Cummings1, Alexander Stimpson1, Kenneth H. Goodrich2

1Duke University

2NASA Langley Research Center

March 14, 2018

NASA Ames/ADF EAS Dispatcher Workshop

Nneji, V. C., Cummings, M. L.,

Stimpson, A. J., & Goodrich, K. H.

(2018). Functional Requirements

for Remotely Managing Fleets of

On-Demand Passenger Aircraft.

In 2018 AIAA Aerospace

Sciences Meeting (p. 2007).

Outline

1. What is a remote operations center (ROC)?

2. Why would we need ROCs for on-demand mobility (ODM)?

3. How could ROC requirements vary with autonomous systems?

4. What should we consider when staffing and designing ROCs?

5. Where do we need to focus our ROC efforts for ODM concepts to become operational?

2

What is a remote operations center (ROC)?

3

ROC

Vehicle

•Pilot

•Passenger

Vertiport

•Ticket Agent/ Customer Service

•Maintenance Personnel

•Safety/ Security Agent

Environment

•ATC

•Local Weather Tracker

•Regional Network Manager

1 2 3 4 5

Why would we need ROCs for on-demand mobility (ODM)?

4

Vehicle concept by Aurora (2017)

Vehicle concept by Vahana (2016)

Vehicle and vertiport concept by Lilium (2017)

1 2 3 4 5

ROC concept by Ehang (2016)ROC concept by Ehang (2016)

Why would we need ROCs for on-demand mobility (ODM)?

5

• To remotely manage fleets of vehicles

• To interface with air traffic control

• Conflict avoidance

• Separation of aircraft

• Scheduling of shared resources

1 2 3 4 5

Why would we need ROCs for on-demand mobility (ODM)?

6

• Dispatch operations center/call center/supervisory control center

• Energy requirements

• Passenger requirements

• Contingency requirements

1 2 3 4 5

How could ROC requirements vary with autonomous systems?

7

Maintain Vehicle SafetyMaintain Safe Separation

• From other Participating Vehicles

• From Fixed and Dynamic Hazards

Maintain Vehicle Control

• Nominal and Contingency Limits

• Physical and Cyber Security

Maintain Sufficient Conditions to Complete Trip

• Ride Quality

• Energy

• Vehicle Performance

• Navigation Accuracy

1 2 3 4 5

A Concept of Operations for On-Demand Passenger Aircraft

8

1. Passenger requests flight

2. Passenger and pilot arrive to depot

3. Pilot completes pre-takeoff checks

4. Pilot maneuvers aircraft for takeoff

5. Enroute

6. Pilot communicates with dispatch for clear landing pad

7. Pilot lands aircraft

8. Aircraft is serviced

Nneji, Stimpson, Cummings, &

Goodrich (2017). Exploring

Concepts of Operations for On-

Demand Passenger Air

Transportation. In 17th AIAA

Aviation Technology,

Integration, and Operations

Conference (p. 3085).

1 2 3 4 5

9

1. Passenger requests flight

2. Passenger and pilot arrive to depot

3. Pilot completes pre-takeoff checks

4. Pilot maneuvers

aircraft for takeoff

5. Enroute

6. Pilot communicates with dispatch for clear landing pad

7. Pilot lands aircraft

8. Aircraft is serviced

ConventionalVehicle Autonomy Revolutionary Evolutionary*

1. Passenger requests flight

2. Passenger arrives to depot

3. System completes pre-takeoff checks

4. Aircraft maneuvers

for takeoff

5. Enroute

6. Aircraft communicates with dispatch for clear landing pad

7. Aircraft lands

8. Aircraft is serviced

7. Aircraft lands

1. Passenger requests flight

2. Passenger and pilot arrive to depot

3. Pilot completes pre-takeoff checks

4. Pilot supervises

aircraft takeoff

5. Enroute

6. Pilot communicates with dispatch for clear landing pad

7. Pilot supervises aircraft landing

8. Aircraft is serviced

1 2 3 4 5

Nneji, Stimpson, Cummings, &

Goodrich (2017). Exploring

Concepts of Operations for On-

Demand Passenger Air

Transportation. In 17th AIAA

Aviation Technology,

Integration, and Operations

Conference (p. 3085).

How could ROC requirements vary with autonomous systems?

10

Function to Maintain:Remote Operations Center Tasks

Conventional Revolutionary Vehicle Autonomy Evolutionary* Vehicle Autonomy

Safe Separation from

traffic

Plan flights within

ATC restrictions

Monitor airspace status, command

aircraft to UTM

Monitor airspace, communicate with

pilots if adjusting separation

Safe separation from

hazards

Plan flights to avoid

obstructions

Calibrate fleet maps with local

infrastructure data streams

Share new information w/ & between

PIC to avoid hazards

Vehicle control Communicate with

PIC if rerouting

Monitor A/C sensor-actuator status,

use AIDA if rerouting

Monitor fleet, use AIDA if rerouting &

communicate w/ PIC

Physical and cyber

security

Verify PIC, monitor Monitor fleet network status, maintain

command authority

Verify PIC, communicate & maintain

alertness

Energy management Compute flight

energy

Compute feasibility to land, ensure

sufficient between re-charges

Monitor fleet, provide PIC safe landing

alternatives if low energy

Navigation Follow flights Verify navigation of A/Cs on approach Verify navigation w/ PIC

Ride quality Communicate with

PIC if disturbance

Monitor A/C sensors, communicate

pertinent new info with passengers

Monitor & provide update information

for passenger comfort

Systems management Communicate with

PIC in contingency

Monitor network, supervisory control if

A/C fails, redirect resources w/ AIDA

Monitor subsystem health,

communicate w/ PIC if A/C fails

1 2 3 4 5

What should we consider when staffing and designing ROCs?

• Customer service

• Vertiport service

• Resource scheduling

• Vehicle command authority

• Teams of human and AI agents• Path planning

• Scheduling

• Resource allocation

• Remote operator tactical interface• Monitor

• Command

• Scaling up to network-level• Exception management

• Emergent behavior identification

11

1 2 3 4 5

Where do we need to focus our ROC efforts for ODM concepts to become operational?

• Metrics for ROC operator workload, system safety and efficiency

• How many more or less ROC operators can be staffed to manage vehicles with revolutionary autonomy?

• Which types of artificial intelligence decision aids should be designed for ROC operators?

• How many different types of ODM vehicles can be managed?

• How many vehicles can be managed at a time?

12

As vehicles and vertiports are being designed, ROC concepts must also be investigated

to support equivalent or better levels of performance on functional requirements.

1 2 3 4 5

13

1 2 3 4 5

How will these remote operations

centers need to innovate to support

new fleet demands?

14

Remote

Operator

Remote

Operator

Task Assignment

Service Process

Shift

Team Size

AI Support

Team Coordination

Attention Allocation

Team Expertise

Attention Allocation

Environment

Fleet Size

Fleet Heterogeneity

Fleet Autonomy

Arrival Process 𝜆

Model Input Parameters Data Recorded from Case Study

Service time of remote operators Duration of task performance

Arrival process of fleet condition-

and team coordination-

generated and events

Arrival times of planning, calls,

and issue resolutions tasks

during shift

Multinomial distribution event

type

Count of each type of task

arriving during shift

MethodsCollective Case Study

Discrete Event Simulation

Model Output Measures

Workload

Delays

Throughput

Errors

15

Workload Delays Throughput

MotivationTransportation networks rely on

remote operations centers (ROCs)

Reduction in crew size and rise in

vehicle and network autonomy

ROCs required for supervisory

control

Acknowledgements

• American Airlines, Southwest Airlines, Rio Grande Pacific Company, UPS

• FAA, NASA Ames, NUAIR, UTM, Kairos, Uber, Airbus A3, Ehang, Lilium Aviation, Gryphon Sensors, Lockheed Martin-Sikorsky

• Federal Railroad Administration and US Department of Transportation

• National Institute of Aerospace and NASA Langley Research Center

• Missy Cummings, Alfredo Garcia, Jeffrey Glass, Michael Zavlanos

• Comrades in Duke Robotics and AIAA

16

Thank you

Let’s get coffee: vcn3@duke.edulinkedin.com/in/victorian @ifindx

17

References

• 1 Holden, J., and Goel, N., Fast-Forwarding to a Future of On-Demand Urban Air Transportation, San Francisco: 2016.

• 2 Nneji, V. C., Stimpson, A., Cummings, M. (Missy), and Goodrich, K. H., “Exploring Concepts of Operations for On-Demand Passenger Air Transportation,” 17th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference, NASA, ed., Denver, CO: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics AVIATION Forum, 2017, pp. 1–12.

• 3 Mueller, E. R., Kopardekar, P. H., and Goodrich, K. H., “Enabling Airspace Integration for High-Density On-Demand Mobility Operations,” 17th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference, 2017, pp. 1–24.

• 4 Gao, F., Cummings, M. L., and Solovey, E., “Designing for robust and effective teamwork in human-agent teams,” Robust Intelligence and Trust in Autonomous Systems, R. Mittu, D. Sofge, A. Wagner, and W.F. Lawless, eds., Springer US, 2016, pp. 167–190.

• 5 Mekdeci, B., and Cummings, M. L., “Modeling multiple human operators in the supervisory control of heterogeneous unmanned vehicles,” Proceedings of the 9th Workshop on Performance Metrics for Intelligent Systems, 2009, pp. 1–8.

• 6 Federal Aviation Administration, Aircraft Dispatcher Practical Test Standards, USA: Flight Standards Service, 2013.

• 7 Stouffer, V. L., and Goodrich, K. H., “State of the Art of Autonomous Platforms and Human-Machine Systems: Only a Fool Would Stand In the Way of Progress,” 15th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference, 2015, pp. 1–15.

• 8 Hemm, R. V., Horio, B. M., DeCicco, A. H., and Lee, D. A., “Assessment of System Safety Risks for NextGen Concepts and Technologies,” 12th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations (ATIO) Conference, Indianapolis: 2012, pp. 1–25.

• 9 Rogers, R., Pilot Authority and Aircraft Protections, Airworthiness Performance Evaluation and Certification Committee, Air Line Pilots Association 1999.

• 10 Besco, R. O., “Releasing the Hook on the Copilot’s Catch 22,” Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 39th Annual Meeting, 1995, pp. 20–24.

18

References

• 11 Speciale, R. C., and Venhuizen, B. D., “The Pilot in Command and the FARS: The Buck Stops Here (Almost Always),” North Dakota Law Review, vol. 83, 2007, pp. 817–836.

• 12 Bredereke, J., and Lankenau, A., “A Rigorous View of Mode Confusion,” Computer Safety, Reliability and Security, 21st International Conference, SAFECOMP 2002, S. Anderson, ed., Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2002, pp. 19–31.

• 13 Burgstaller, S., Flowers, D., Tamberrino, D., Terry, H. P., and Yang, Y., Rethinking Mobility, 2017.

• 14 Sheridan, T. B., “Teleoperation, telerobotics and telepresence: A progress report,” Control Engineering Practice, vol. 3, 1995, pp. 205–214.

• 15 Castonia, R. W., Boussemart, Y., and Cummings, M. L., “The Design of a HSMM-based Operator State Modeling Display,” AIAA Infotech@ Aerospace, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2010, pp. 1–10.

• 16 Stimpson, A. J., Tucker, M. B., Ono, M., Steffy, A., and Cummings, M. L., “Modeling risk perception for mars rover supervisory control: Before and after wheel damage,” IEEE Aerospace, 2017, pp. 1–8.

• 17 Ososky, S., Sanders, T., Jentsch, F., Hancock, P., and Chen, J. Y. C., “Determinants of system transparency and its influence on trust in and reliance on unmanned robotic systems,” SPIE Defense+ Security, R.E. Karlsen, D.W. Gage, C.M. Shoemaker, and G.R. Gerhart, eds., International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2014, pp. 1–12.

• 18 Kaber, D. B., and Endsley, M. R., “The effects of level of automation and adaptive automation on human performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task,” Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, vol. 5, 2004, pp. 113–153.

19